The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

FrancieBrady

Sweet.Science wrote: »

There is no alternative . Anyone can suggest one . You could suggest a 1000 houses being built on another site . Its all pie in the sky stuff

They had this site ready to go . They had contracts in place for them to be built . Until SOB contacted residents in his area who werent happy council homes were being.

So he suggested more homes on another site as a way of delaying this. The plan is to delay this as long as possible until it falls through.

Thats whats happening here . If you are blinded by politics and convincing yourself otherwise fair enough . I'd rather not discuss it further

Was the planning process completed?

Are you suggesting planning law should be overlooked? Which is a different issue.

Can you link to how you know there is 'no' alternative?

The above is precisely why you will find no post by me criticising objections to planning. I am not local and don't know the grounds for objections and I am mindful also that our system means TD's have to represent their local constituents. Which is a double edged sword.

So tell us what you actually know about this local issue...please don't make statements like: 'There is no alternative', without rpoviding back up for that etc.

doublejobbing 2

grayzer75 wrote: »

Politician conveys the wishes of his constituents shock.......

Why should residents have a say on what is built on public land? The general public should only be allowed object to a development if the site is of historical importance or it is an area that should remain unspoiled (the loony plans for the Hellfire Club area being a good example)

If you are worried about traffic, or the site creating dusty conditions, **** off and live in the countryside. The only valid objection to a social housing development should be concerns about who is given the homes (scumbags, people who have been in Ireland all of five minutes etc)

McMurphy

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Why are you comparing it to Leo and FG ? Can both not make bad decisions ? Or if one is worse the other doesnt count ?

Do you remember typing this out?

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Haha you are making it worse

Leo was the devil forcing people onto the streets

EOB was the saviour who was going to give houses to all. Now he is objecting to social houses being built.

What a spoofer.

To answer your question, that's why I'm comparing them.

atticu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Identifying a better site and proposing 15 -20 more houses to be built on the original site designed for those wanting to downsize and so free up more houses.

What ‘better site’ was identified?
And can you please provide a link to the proposal for 15 to 20 more houses.

Thank you.

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

What ‘better site’ was identified?
And can you please provide a link to the proposal for 15 to 20 more houses.

Thank you.

As I said, I don't criticise TD's (from any party)having to do things like this as there are always local nuances I am not aware of and can only go on info in the media.

Here is the line that seems to suggest there was 'another site' a site I presume the objectors thought was 'better'

Mr McManus said Sinn Féin’s proposal to move the development to a nearby site would delay the project for at least another six months.

FrancieBrady

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

Why should residents have a say on what is built on public land?

You wish to change the planning process - fair enough - but that really is another issue altogether.

piplip87

Sinn Fein do not want the housing crisis solved.

They have objected, delayed and blocked quite a few developments at this stage. Blocking social housing is a new low though.

I'd wonder is it a case of FF/FG hit building targets = loss of votes for SF.

Then again they basically privatised social housing in the North, while raising council rents during the pandemic. So just like innocent victims of violence they are using the homeless crisis for votes.

jm08

piplip87 wrote: »

Sinn Fein do not want the housing crisis solved.

They have objected, delayed and blocked quite a few developments at this stage. Blocking social housing is a new low though.

I'd wonder is it a case of FF/FG hit building targets = loss of votes for SF.

Then again they basically privatised social housing in the North, while raising council rents during the pandemic. So just like innocent victims of violence they are using the homeless crisis for votes.

According to Newton Emerson, what Sinn Fein did in the north with housing was excellent. The Housing Executive in NI hasn't built a house since the mid-90s (possibly because it had no access to any finance and what they have done has made access for finance for the Housing Executive easier).



https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/success-on-housing-in-north-could-be-sinn-f%C3%A9in-s-route-to-government-in-south-1.4400175

Sweet.Science

jm08 wrote: »

According to Newton Emerson, what Sinn Fein did in the north with housing was excellent. The Housing Executive in NI hasn't built a house since the mid-90s (possibly because it had no access to any finance and what they have done has made access for finance for the Housing Executive easier).



https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/success-on-housing-in-north-could-be-sinn-f%C3%A9in-s-route-to-government-in-south-1.4400175

There are 20,000 homeless people in Northern Ireland .

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/20000-northern-ireland-households-are-now-homeless-37719853.html

RandomViewer

Sweet.Science wrote: »

There are 20,000 homeless people in Northern Ireland .

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/20000-northern-ireland-households-are-now-homeless-37719853.html

Definition of homeless is different, if the republic used the same metrics figures would be 4-5 times higher
https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/system/files/publications/communities/ni-homelessness-bulletin-apr-sep-2018.PDF

Sweet.Science

RandomViewer wrote: »

Definition of homeless is different, if the republic used the same metrics figures would be 4-5 times higher
https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/system/files/publications/communities/ni-homelessness-bulletin-apr-sep-2018.PDF

Really . Looks like ROI would be a lot less if they went with what you've linked ?

Can you explain the differences

Politicians in the north have said their housing system is broken and not fit for purpose . Like in ROI . They must be all wrong

blanch152

McMurphy wrote: »

Didn't Leo object to a building going up in his constituency, because - reasons.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/taoiseach-leo-varadkar-defends-objections-to-constituency-development-claiming-area-has-been-blighted-36155759.html


It's what they do bish, they all pander to their constituents.

Didn't take long, did it?

Leo lives in people's heads.

Sweet.Science

blanch152 wrote: »

Didn't take long, did it?

Leo lives in people's heads.

Irrelevant . They can both be wrong . Which they have been .

blanch152

piplip87 wrote: »

Sinn Fein do not want the housing crisis solved.

They have objected, delayed and blocked quite a few developments at this stage. Blocking social housing is a new low though.

I'd wonder is it a case of FF/FG hit building targets = loss of votes for SF.

Then again they basically privatised social housing in the North, while raising council rents during the pandemic. So just like innocent victims of violence they are using the homeless crisis for votes.

Of course it is. If you look around Dublin at local level at which party leads the charge against development, it is nearly always Sinn Fein.

They don't have an interest in housing people, they have an interest in protest politics.

RandomViewer

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Really . Looks like ROI would be a lot less if they went with what you've linked ?

Can you explain the differences

Politicians in the north have said their housing system is broken and not fit for purpose . Like in ROI . They must be all wrong

This might make it clearer
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/election-2020-fact-check-how-many-people-are-homeless-in-northern-ireland-1.4162666

Idbatterim

thomas 123 wrote: »

I doubt it, considering my generation just live to work.

As for sf voters deflecting? Do you really think anyone who voted sf before would condemn them for this ?

- Let’s see Stephen Donnelly - ran as Independent, switched to FF, still got in again.

- Leo Varadkar - shared state information for private sector gain, still there.

- Martin - how many u-turns and lies? Still there.

- Foley - missing for months when she’s most needed, no plans, department in crisis, still there.

- Mother and baby homes, report leaked before the actual subjects of the report could see it, government still
There.

- Affordable housing for those of us that have to pay our way shelved under the guise of covid. Yeah yeah, shared equity great, let’s get that average house price up
to 5-600k!

In summary I think O’Broin carrying out the wishes of those who put him where he is today is not really that big of an issue on the scale of things now is it?

obroinn will get in by a landslide, in my opinion morals and intergrity are worth something! Constantly looking after the I am alright jacks, dont build here, dont build there. No doubt many of them complaining from their free houses the bloody hypocrites.

Pandering to several votes you MIGHT lose but denying as many as those votes, a roof over their head, housing, is truly pathetic.

Jinglejangle69

McMurphy wrote: »

Didn't Leo object to a building going up in his constituency, because - reasons.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/taoiseach-leo-varadkar-defends-objections-to-constituency-development-claiming-area-has-been-blighted-36155759.html


It's what they do bish, they all pander to their constituents.

Look over there!

You're the first to point out when someone mentions SF on a FG thread and scream whataboutery.

You've no issue here.

Hypocrisy of the highest order.

Jinglejangle69

blanch152 wrote: »

Of course it is. If you look around Dublin at local level at which party leads the charge against development, it is nearly always Sinn Fein.

They don't have an interest in housing people, they have an interest in protest politics.

And people are falling for the lie they actually care about housing people when it's to get votes for the only thing they care about.

A United Ireland is all they see.

Idbatterim

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

And people are falling for the lie they actually care about housing people when it's to get votes for the only thing they care about.

A United Ireland is all they see.

it may be there ultimate vision, but I dont see a united ireland coming about any quicker with SF in power, in fact it may hinder or delay it, if it ever comes about...

Fann Linn

FG in no position to talk about housing. Even they agree they lost the last election over their housing policy.

James Brown

Sweet.Science wrote: »

If SF (who everyone pins their hopes on to solve the housing crisis) object to a paltry 28 unit development what does that say ? The housing issue will just get worse and worse every year.

Thousands are needed every year . Cant even get 28 up without them being delayed for years

six months.

The move to an alternate site because the request to build less on the site was refused.
As regards putting hopes on SF to solve housing, it's very simple; FG and it seems FF are happy to spend tax money on leases, private rentals and purchases. SF and others seem to be more interested in serving the public than FF/FG cronies in building state owned properties. That's it really.

There isnt a party with a plan to solve housing in a way that would work even on the terms they claim.

Ive moved away from kneejerk criticising sf policy because **** it, theyre right to say "your way is a proven balls up, lets try ours" and i reckon of em all, across all issues, o broin has an actual germ of an idea to attack what's needed

Now their habit of blocking development at local level is shameless too, that has to be said

James Brown

Fann Linn wrote: »

FG in no position to talk about housing. Even they agree they lost the last election over their housing policy.

The honest ones. The rest will never accept their short comings opting to blame the public and SF supporters who seemingly never voted before, while the FG voters sat that one out :rolleyes:

Jinglejangle69

Fann Linn wrote: »

FG in no position to talk about housing. Even they agree they lost the last election over their housing policy.

You should take this to the FG thread so.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

There isnt a party with a plan to solve housing in a way that would work even on the terms they claim.

Ive moved away from kneejerk criticising sf policy because **** it, theyre right to say "your way is a proven balls up, lets try ours" and i reckon of em all, across all issues, o broin has an actual germ of an idea to attack what's needed

Now their habit of blocking development at local level is shameless too, that has to be said

Seems to me from reviewing the info in the article that they haven't blocked housing - they have suggested a way of building these houses in a way that will actually house more people.

Just throwing up houses isn't the answer either, we can see the mistakes of those policies all around us.

Idbatterim

Bowie wrote: »

six months.

The move to an alternate site because the request to build less on the site was refused.
As regards putting hopes on SF to solve housing, it's very simple; FG and it seems FF are happy to spend tax money on leases, private rentals and purchases. SF and others seem to be more interested in serving the public than FF/FG cronies in building state owned properties. That's it really.

I would like to see the speculation ended once and for all. FFG are a proven farce, SF an unknown, lets see what they do if voted in... Wouldnt surprise me if they do just prefer to be in opposition, time will tell. next election will be very interesting. Can you imagine what our budgets are going to look like come next election time, if during the boom that ended with covid, the two budgets before it, there werent even welfare increases or tax decreases, coming into an election year! LOL!

Housing crisis will be worse than ever and state finances will be in a bad way, karma for FFG!

a very cool kid

atticu wrote: »

What ‘better site’ was identified?
And can you please provide a link to the proposal for 15 to 20 more houses.

Thank you.

My understanding is that the proposed site is already subject to a plan for further housing to be built on it...either way it's less new houses.

atticu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here is the line that seems to suggest there was 'another site' a site I presume the objectors thought was 'better'

Now, let’s look at what you said before you admitted that you ‘presume’.

You were trying to present your opinion as fact.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Identifying a better site and proposing 15 -20 more houses to be built on the original site designed for those wanting to downsize and so free up more houses.

Not getting the crime or the outrage here folks.

You can’t back that up, but you also did not say it was your opinion.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They didn't 'just' object though, did they? They are proposing an alternative that is a net gain for numbers housed.

Seem to me that they are doing their jobs, unless I'm missing something.

When they do it and have alternatives that seem to be better solutions, I ain't seeing an issue to be honest...shouldn't everyone be happy? Constituents, and those who want the maximum amount housed?

Well, it seems that by your own admission that they did ‘just’ object.
So, again the above is just your opinion, and not fact.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

.
but an alternative that will see more houses built and more people homed has been offered here.

Outline what the problem is here.

Well, the simple problem with the above is that it is just your opinion that you are trying to present as factual.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can you link to how you know there is 'no' alternative?


So tell us what you actually know about this local issue...please don't make statements like: 'There is no alternative', without rpoviding back up for that etc.

And in the above you are telling a poster not to do what you did.

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

Now, let’s look at what you said before you admitted that you ‘presume’.

You were trying to present your opinion as fact.




You can’t back that up, but you also did not say it was your opinion.




Well, it seems that by your own admission that they did ‘just’ object.
So, again the above is just your opinion, and not fact.




Well, the simple problem with the above is that it is just your opinion that you are trying to present as factual.





And in the above you are telling a poster not to do what you did.

What???

I read the article in which another site was talked about.

No need for the Hercule Poirot just because you didn't see that line and thought I was making it up.

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

It's what they do bish, they all pander to their constituents.

So why do you give SF a pass when they do it yet, constantly remind us all when Leo does it?

Hypocrite much?